- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 12:57:39 -0500
- To: Dave Peterson <davep@acm.org>
- CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org, w3c-xml-sig@w3.org
Dave Peterson wrote: > > At 8:47 AM 7/17/97, Dan Connolly wrote: > > >Bert looked into this, and he came up with: > > >clearer if Bison had accepted some common notations for grammars. The > >grammar that is actually intended is as follows: > > > >document: prolog element misc*; > >prolog: VERSION? ENCODING? misc*; > >misc: COMMENT | attribute_decl; > >attribute_decl: ATTDEF NAME attribute+ ENDDEF; > >element: START attribute* empty_or_content; > >empty_or_content: SLASH CLOSE | CLOSE content END NAME? CLOSE; > >content: (DATA | misc | element)*; > >attribute: NAME (EQ VALUE)?; > > Attribute declarations outside the prolog? I hope not. If you look into the details[1], you'll see that Bert is using the PI syntax for attribute defaults proposed (and revoked) a while back. It has the advantage that it can be lexically scoped inside any element. [1] http://www.w3.org/XML/9707/XML-in-C -- Dan Connolly http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 20 July 1997 13:55:55 UTC